Money Lessons for Kids (and Parents)

Kids today have a pretty challenging money legacy. From different kinds of student loans to exotic mortgages and default interest rates, the answer to the question “Can I afford this?” has taken a trip down the rabbit hole.

Parents are scrambling to prepare their children for this brave new reality. In an article for the WSJ (subscription required), Jonathan Clements lists four “financial tricks” to try with your children so that they’ll grow up to be money-smart adults:

Favoring Today

Offer your child his regular allowance, or a greater amount if he's willing to wait a week before getting it.

Slowing Spending

Give your child his money in the largest denomination rather than a combination of smaller denominations (a $5 bill instead of five $1 bills, for example).

Making a Wish List

When your child expresses desire for a particular toy or other expenditure, have her write it down on a list. Go back to the list later and ask which items she would like to use her own money to buy or would like to receive as a birthday or holiday gift.

Keeping the Change

See how your child makes purchasing decisions when he is given an amount of money and allowed to keep the change compared to when you ask for the change back.

As a clinician, I appreciate how these four activities really do open up the cognitive and emotional processes we use to make decisions about money.

Favoring Today
The “favoring today” experiment demonstrates your child’s time preference for delayed gratification. All of us have a time preference for delayed gratification**, which is basically the point at which it becomes worth it for us to trade the opportunity of the present for some potential future gain.

Many things influence a person’s particular time preference, age first and foremost. For a very young child the future is still a murky concept, and it’s unreasonable to expect a four-year-old to choose $7 next week over $5 this week even though it’s 40% more. A perfect time to start playing with the favoring today exercise is around age nine or 10, when the child develops the ability to conceptualize the future and to compare present gratification against future gain.

Besides age, the level of perceived deprivation in the child’s environment plays a key role in shaping time preference. Five dollars means more to a person who feels he has very little than it does to a person who feels he has much.

A person’s early experiences with trust also factor in. Children who are exposed to instability in their caregivers or environment are basically taught to devalue the potential over the concrete present. If a child has learned that a promise for $7 next week might go unfulfilled, he will always opt for the $5 today.

Slowing Spending
The “slowing spending” trick employs a person’s “bias for the whole.” In children and adults, bias for the whole refers to the tendency to hold a larger bill in higher regard than the equal amount in smaller bills. It’s easier for us to comprehend the value of $100 when we see a $100 bill. When we see ten $10 bills, we perceive a number of potential values based on combinations of the bills -- $20 here, $50 there – and it’s easier to part with the smaller amounts.

Using a debit or credit card totally circumvents this bias by taking away the perception that we are breaking any “whole” at all. Maybe we adults should play with this exercise a little more often, too!

Making a Wish List
Learning to modify impulses is a cornerstone of maturity. Making a wish list helps children to review their choices outside of the impulse of the moment. When children practice identifying, examining, and re-evaluating their wants it plants the seeds for self-aware purchasing in later life.

What this also does is start to organize wants for comparison with other wants. When working with clients around budgeting, I have found that this can be a revolutionary concept. Consider the difference between these two questions: “Do you want to go out to dinner?” vs. “Do you want to go out to dinner more than you want cable television?” Wants cannot be considered in the abstract, they must always be evaluated in comparison with the other available choices.

Keeping the Change
Some people have an innate preference for saving vs. spending even as children. Giving your child the opportunity to spend or keep the money given to her will show you where your child’s preference is – for that particular moment in time.

It is totally appropriate for children to experiment with decision-making behavior and for their choices to range all over the place. One week your son may blow every last cent you give him and have to borrow a dollar from his friend besides, another week he may be more penny-pinching than Ebenezer Scrooge.

Keeping the change is a great mini-lesson on budgeting. For what is a budget after all but a system of allocating amounts for expenses? Five dollars for souvenirs on a field trip is basically a $5 single-item budget. When sonny decides that he prefers some alternative use for the money, be it savings or a future spending opportunity, you are giving him a safe experience in financial autonomy.

The author of this article expressed it best when he suggested that parents “try these tricks on your kids, talk to them about the lessons to be learned – and then quietly muse about whether you, too, fall prey to these financial traps.” These activities are not lessons in and of themselves. They are a jumping off point for parents to engage their children in developing how money works for them.

** See Shlomo Maital's Money, Minds, and Markets. Ch. 3: From Pleasure to Reality, Learning to Wait Begins in Childhood. Basic Books 1981.

Read full post »

The Jack Sprat Accord

Remember that nursery rhyme about Jack Sprat and his wife? Evidently Mr. Sprat had a predilection for leaner fare while his wife was more of a… gourmand. Between the two of them, so the story goes, they managed to efficiently apportion meals and thus together they would “lick the platter clean.”

Food tastes and food consumption are often a handy metaphor when it comes to material tastes and material consumption. Not that one can use eating behavior to predict what kind of consumer a person will be – in fact, oftentimes sublimated physical hunger is translated into a compulsion to buy – but there are certain areas of overlap. Unconscious eating often accompanies unconscious spending, for example.

But back to Mr. Sprat et famille. The point of the rhyme is to show how differences in partners often lead to greater stability or efficiency in the overall system. Two individuals may have certain extremes that are evened out by the opposite traits in their partners.

In my own work with couples this often seems to be true. Perhaps the two spouses are not as dynamically opposed as the Sprats, but even where there is a high degree of harmony and overlap there are inevitably certain areas where members of a couple find themselves coming from two very different positions (not Mars and Venus necessarily, but you get the drift).

Many times this is the case when it comes to responding to financial crisis. I’m not talking here about day-to-day financial management or long-term planning. In in these areas there is a greater likelihood that the partners have worked out some sort of agreement or at least had a discussion about how such a task will be approached. But in a financial crisis we often revert right back to our core selves, when primitive impulses grab hold and the decision-making process becomes more reactive.

Sometimes these reactions catch a couple off-guard and make it more difficult to negotiate how to respond to the crisis. One partner may want to sell everything in the house and the other may be equally convinced that they need to hold on to every last little item because they won’t be able to buy anything else they may need. Each feels that they are offering up the best and most practical response, yet they cannot understand how the other person sees it so differently.

It would be a mistake for the couple to become mired in trying to convince, coerce, or manipulate each other into simply accepting one person's course over the other. Usually reactive positions are too extreme to provide a truly workable solution. Also, the “solution” may be implemented at a serious cost to the relationship if a partner feels shut down and shut out of so important a decision.

One reason it is difficult for couples to find compromise in this area is because they think they are arguing the merits of their suggested course, but chances are they are really reliving a previous trauma.

Financial crises threaten our most basic sense of security. For someone who experienced distress around money as a child (which includes many if not most of us at one point or another), going through a financial crisis as an adult is likely to re-activate that part of the self that once felt completely vulnerable, afraid, and overwhelmed. When we are children we are powerless to affect the course of action taken by our parents yet we suffer their anxieties and yearn to help resolve the problem.

Often the “solutions” we perceive then are small acts of self-control or strategies for self-protection. We may tell ourselves “I won’t let Mommy know that that’s the doll I want because it’s too expensive and it would upset her not to be able to buy it,” or “If I rip my shirt I will try to pin the hole so I won’t get yelled at for ruining more of my clothes.”

These seemingly minor actions are the germs of adult behavior patterns to come. “Don’t tell Mommy I want” is a way of exerting control by cutting off feelings of desire, and can easily grow into the adult reaction of “sell everything in the house.” Hiding the tear in the shirt is a conservation response that protects against fear that a replacement can’t be had (or is not worth the misery it takes to get it).

Early experiences are the foundation upon which we build our patterns of preference. In a crisis, there is a strong emotional component to the experience that may contend or even defy the part of us that is rational.

Because these early events are often unconscious and do not readily spring to mind in a crisis – who would equate not getting a coveted doll with trying to stave off foreclosure? – couples are often at a loss as to how to find a common course of action AND support each other. Working with a clinician who is competent in financial wellness can help, as can having an idea of one’s own emotional and historical territory around money.

When it comes to financial decision-making, what constitutes a “good” or “bad” choice is only partly about the bottom line. Other concerns are also important. Personal integrity matters, as does trust. Maintaining a nurturing relationship should be included as a priority.

If it does not threaten their security, couples should endeavor to use a financial crisis as an opportunity for exploration and growth. Sometimes when people discover where their preference pattern began they are able to diffuse some of the emotional intensity behind it, allowing them to determine a more balanced and rational course of action. They may also be better able to hear their partner's point of view and elect a solution that takes both positions into account – the Jack Sprat Accord, if you will.

When a solution is emotionally balanced and co-developed, not only is there a better chance for cooperation and success in resolving the problem, but there may be a renewed sense of intimacy in the partnership as well. Licking the crisis together can be the greatest reward of all.

Read full post »

The Belly of Beliefs

Most therapists I know love the word “inappropriate.” In social work assessment, where we look at how the individual functions in his/her environment, “inappropriate” usually means that something in the client’s presentation is inconsistent with other aspects of his/her life. In my work, a good example of this would be, “The client’s lack of anxiety was inappropriate given the severity of his financial crisis.”

Inappropriate is a flag for further investigation. When we probe how individuals think and feel about the events in their lives and their role in shaping these events, we find a gateway to clients' underlying beliefs.

Belief frameworks are what financial wellness work is all about. Beliefs tell us what is “good” and “bad” behavior, and we measure ourselves against these internal standards. Most beliefs about good and bad can be traced back to our families, the original crucible where we are taught how to understand and interpret the world. Depending on the circumstances, children come to either accept (repeat) or reject (react against) their parents’ interpretations.

If prompted, most people can recite a laundry list of financial lessons learned when they were growing up. Some are popular adages, such as “money doesn’t grow on trees,” or “if you do what you love, the money will follow.”

However, the strongest beliefs are often unconscious, and uncovering these unconscious beliefs can even surprise the person who holds them. Children are finely attuned to the emotions of their caregivers, so when a parent angrily tosses off a comment like, “Look at that jerk in the BMW,” a child may understand this to mean that having a nice car is somehow associated with being a jerk, so if they want their parent’s love they shouldn’t have expensive things. This may sound far-fetched, but I’ve treated many adults who experience powerful ambivalence about material good fortune, and in 9 cases out of 10 it is because a parent felt unfairly thwarted or punished by others’ success.

Parents themselves can be surprised to learn what interpretations their children are making. Children lack adult cognition, so when left to fill in the blanks they can make wild leaps that may be far out of line with what the parent intended. If seeing mom take out the checkbook to pay bills is usually followed by a period of crabbiness and hearing her say “no” to anything you ask, you’d better believe that children will learn to fear that checkbook. Because of this, a parent who is careful to the penny may have a child who eschews even the most basic activities of financial management because he associates them with anxiety.

Parents can mediate this by talking about money more openly with their children. Asking children what they think about who should earn the money in a family or how the family’s money gets spent can provide parents with an opportunity to guide and reshape beliefs as they form.

For adults, cognitive therapy techniques can be an effective in exposing beliefs that are unconsciously directing present day actions.

Though we may think about money often, many of us still experience a disconnection between financial activities and the more personal aspects of our lives including relationships, values, and dreams. Yet money is a subject that is deeply personal, often painful, and very seldom rational. Financial wellness work is a way of exploring the role of money its full context: taking into account our cognitive processes around money, how money is a factor in our social environment, and how we learned about money in our family.

Read full post »